Gee, I just heard on CNN yesterday afternoon about how Obama is so far ahead of Romney in Ohio, that Romney should just give up now. Since Romney won't win Ohio, he won't be able to get to the 270 threshold.

That's certainly good news for the country, that the gap in this critical state has narrowed.

But it's really disturbing that so many of my fellow Ohioans are so bereft of philosophy, so scatterbrained and out of touch, that they could be swayed from supporting one side to supporting the other, with such a gulf between the two sides, by one 90 minute debate where neither man said anything of substance.

Obama supporters lined up to greet the president in Madison, Wisc., on Thursday. While there, they were asked by Rebel Pundit if they thought it was fair that Obama didn’t have his teleprompter at the debate this week. Pure video gold.

My fave is the weepy college undergrad who whined, "Why? Why would you not let him use his teleprompter?"

I have said several times on this blog going back at least six months that as a liberal while I of course want Obama to win, Romney would also have his pluses. We saw that Wednesday night. Romney has no intentions of getting rid of the pre-existing conditions clause, hence he has no clear path to remove Obama/Romneycare.

He will be the most liberal Republican president since Ford. That might be just what the country needs right now.

Assuming that the tiny portion of those called who chose to respond are a representative sample, and assuming that the turnout model Rasmussen is using is accurate, and adding the uncertainty inherent in both those assumptions to the uncertainty measured by the actual statistics, there is a pretty good chance that the 50-49 guess in Ohio is an accurate measure of the race right now to within +/- 5%.

"This result seems strange. I spent the first part of the week in San Francisco, which is about as deep blue as it gets, and the sense out there was that Romney made mincemeat of Obama."

Yes, but no matter.

Stupid people cling bitterly to their mistakes; they'd rather double down on failure than admit their mistakes by switching their votes.

This is the single biggest hurdle Romney faces: convincing stupid people it's in their interest to admit their president failed, and to make the change for something (so obviously) better than what they have now.

the GOP has cut the Democratic advantage in early voting throughout the state, the changes favoring the Republicans in certain counties has been huge. In Franklin County, home to Columbus, for example, a 2008 Democratic advantage of 5 percent is now a 5 percent GOP advantage. In Cuyahoga County, home to Democratic Cleveland, the GOP has shaved six points off the Democrat's 2008 advantage. And in Hamilton County, home to Cincinnati, Republicans have expanded their 2008 advantage to 13 percent.

I have said several times on this blog going back at least six months that as a liberal while I of course want Obama to win, Romney would also have his pluses. We saw that Wednesday night. Romney has no intentions of getting rid of the pre-existing conditions clause, hence he has no clear path to remove Obama/Romneycare.

He will be the most liberal Republican president since Ford. That might be just what the country needs right now.

However, anybody who listens to him or, more importantly, looks at his record in MA, knows his sensibilities are a lot more Conservative than Axelrod and Plouffe want people to think.

PS Seeing about 8 R signs to 2 O in NE OH.

One guy in Tallmadge made his own, nicely framed and lithographed. Quite impressive.

"According Rasmussen, in Ohio, the race is statistically tied among likely voters with Obama ahead by only a single point: 50-49%. In a tighter screen meant to gauge enthusiasm and "certainty" of voting, it's Romney who takes the lead, 52-48%.

Rasmussen's numbers are back up by pollster We Ask America, which shows Romney leading 47-46%.

The deep dive numbers are even more impressive. Ohio voters trust Romney more on the economy by a margin of 49-45%, and bests Obama on national security, 48-47%."

In Virginia, Romney improved to +1 from -1 in the Rasmussen poll. And WeAskAmerica showed big gains for Romney in Florida and Virginia since September. So there is some evidence of a bounce for Romney.

It all comes down to voter enthusiasm and turnout. The ABO folks would crawl over broken glass. The BO folks, many of them, I think wouldn't walk through a light drizzle. BO best card is the race card, which is why I agreed with Althouse we shouldn't help him play it. I'm looking for some kind of ginned up outrage at that last second. I don't think it will help but I expect something from these believers int he Chicago way.

The local phone directory company here is asking for permission to furnish home telephone books only on request.Business white and yellow pages paid for by the advertisers would continue to be saturation distribution.

Although I think polls can sort of give a generalized picture of how the electorate feels, I don't put much stock in them when they show one candidate or the other up by one or two points.

I do find the Examiner's story that shows a strong uptick in Republican early voting interesting. That shows what voters have done, rather than showing what on out of every 9 or so voters willing to discuss the matter says they will do.

How about the October surprise, right on schedule, that the unemployment rate has fallen below 8%. For that to have happened the economy would have to be growing at 4 - 5%. In other words it's the government blatantly lying to its slaves...er, citizens.

How about the October surprise, right on schedule, that the unemployment rate has fallen below 8%. For that to have happened the economy would have to be growing at 4 - 5%. In other words it's the government blatantly lying to its slaves...er, citizens.

How about the October surprise, right on schedule, that the unemployment rate has fallen below 8%. For that to have happened the economy would have to be growing at 4 - 5%. In other words it's the government blatantly lying to its slaves...er, citizens.

Unless there is a huge Bradley Effect in the making, I dont predict a landslide, a close win and even then, its a toss up.

If the liberal commenters here are indicative of the typical Obama voter, its safe to assume he could sacrifice kittens on national tv and he would still get their vote because Romney, who shut down his business to help a friend look for his missing daughter and who rescued a family from a sinking boat is scary and evil because he's rich.

That would explain why Obama people keep knocking on my door, which is highly annoying.

Obama lost my vote in Ohio. But, as of right now, I don't think I'm going to vote for anyone at all in the presidential race. I'm gonna vote, though, so perhaps I'll write someone in for the heck of it.

I don't know what to make of the polls for the simple fact that the polling phone calls are so obnoxious I don't think many normal people would do anything but hang up. One time, when I was drunk, I gave them false data.

I'm confused, factory orders are down 5+%, GDP has continually been revised down for the last 3 quarters, U6 unemployment continues to to be 14+%, but unemployment is decreasing. Of course there was a surge in seasonal part time work and government employment, but then less we forget the job creation numbers have always been revised downward exponentially from those initially reported by the gov. and media. But today's numbers are good news, but if everyone in the country gets laid off and doesn't look for a job we could achieve statistical full employment, sky's the limit.

Here in Cleveland it is hard to find people who say they are happy about the last 4-years. Aside from that the Obama base is not nearly as animated as the anyone-but-Obama base. Polls that showed Obama in the lead always had very heavy weighting toward Obama. It would be truely surprising to see more Ds than Rs at the polls AND Romney is winning the independents.

"Romney has no intentions of getting rid of the pre-existing conditions clause, hence he has no clear path to remove Obama/Romneycare."

If I were you, I would be less eager to show my ignorance. The "pre-existing conditions" clause is an insurance killer. That was why the mandate was an issue but, after Obama opposed it pre-election in 2008, he encouraged Pelosi and Reid, whose staffs wrote the bill, to make it so weak as to be ineffective. If the mandate had teeth, there would be even more opposition to Obamacare.

The only way to deal with the issue of pre-existing conditions is to create risk pools at the state level and subsidize them to keep premiums affordable. Otherwise, no one would buy insurance until they got sick. By "no one" I mean the irresponsible who comprise Obama's base.

There will have to be a rule about joining a risk pool if you want to be covered. The most irresponsible will still show up in the ER sick but those we will always have with us. I have spent many hours, probably thousands, operating on people with no expectation I would ever get paid. As doctors' incomes decline, it will get very hard to be treated with no coverage at all.

I googled "jobs report" and noticed the press is reporting it exactly as it was intended. First headline: "Jobs report gives Obama much needed boost."

Really, media? Is that all we needed to know about the September jobs report? Not anything about U-6 or labor force participation? All we need to know is that some irrelevant number looks good and might boost Obama's re-election chance?

I don't know what to make of the polls for the simple fact that the polling phone calls are so obnoxious I don't think many normal people would do anything but hang up. One time, when I was drunk, I gave them false data.

If you want to screw with pollsters, or telemarkers, waste their time. First express interest, then tell them you have another call, click to the other line, and go back to reading blogs.

Expressing interest is the key, otherwise they just hang up. I actually had one guy call me back twice. Eventually they put you on the do not call list. Call centers maintain an internal DNC list for people who inconvenience them, and shockingly they're much better at not calling those folks.

But, as of right now, I don't think I'm going to vote for anyone at all in the presidential race. I'm gonna vote, though, so perhaps I'll write someone in for the heck of it.

Please don't not vote. Regardless of what some folks want you to beleive, it still does count for something.

And rather than just writing someone in, you should find a 3rd or 4th political party that is close to your own core beleifs. Given the way the TwoPartySystem stacks the deck against the lil' guys(ballot access laws, public funding for political conventions, invites to debates, etc etc) your vote there will actually be helping out quite a bit.

Most states had "high risk" or "existing condition" insurance pools prior to obamacare."

Sure. It's the only way you can handle the uninsurable. The mandate would be hard to enforce, even with 12,000 more IRS agents. Germany requires insurance unless your income is very high. France does much the same. Our big problem with healthcare is the illegals.

The huge mistake Johnson made in 1965 was to exclude the big city charity hospitals which could have taken all comers wit the option for the insured to go elsewhere. For ideological reasons, they chose to pretend Medicaid was mainstream care.

Undecideds tend to break for challenger. Assuming a 3-1 break for Romney, then right now the race looks like:R: 53.45 O: 46.5

Since its a rolling average I expect to see an uptick over the next few days. Still a month to go but the strategy is to dishearten the right. That tactic seems to be working. Hey, if you can't get people to vote for you then the next best strategy is confuse/fool the people to stay home and not vote for your opponent. It shows the state of the race that this is the tack they have decided they have to take.

the R's are on record saying they will repeal Obamacare in the Senate via reconcillation. "

We still need 3 Senate seats... and that's assuming that every single Republican senator goes along with repeal by reconciliation. I'd hate to have to count on the RINOest member of the Senate, whoever you think that is.

" Please don't not vote. Regardless of what some folks want you to beleive, it still does count for something.

And rather than just writing someone in, you should find a 3rd or 4th political party that is close to your own core beleifs. Given the way the TwoPartySystem stacks the deck against the lil' guys(ballot access laws, public funding for political conventions, invites to debates, etc etc) your vote there will actually be helping out quite a bit."

I'd second that -- write-ins are stupid. No one will ever even read what you wrote, unless your state is so close that the write-ins could flip the final result.

Voting for a minor party at least gets tabulated (since it's done by machine) -- and it does count towards ballot access next time, and even matching funds if a third party candidate manages 5% nationally. (Which he could do without acting as a spoiler, if he picks up the votes primarily in non-swing-states.)

LOL! "Jobbers"!! LOLOLOL! That was quite clever--quite! Because, it's like, Truthers believe Obama was foreign born, when he wasn't! And, like, Jobbers believe the September jobs report was dismal, when it was!

And Alex, you're wrong: I call awful employment figures awful regardless of who's president. Fortunately, unemployment has never been over 7.8% with a Republican president in my lifetime. Funny how that works. Enjoy your spiteful vote!

The Back Nixon's administration that circumvents the law by trying to sneak a work for welfare memo out of HHS, that continues to lie about what led up to the killings in Libya, that lies and stonewalls about fast and furious, that has produced a Justice Dept. that is more politicised than Nixon's, that offers to cover legal cost of defence contractors for breaking the pink slip law, etc., etc. etc. etc. is to be believed when there is a huge down tick in unemployment numbers. A 114000 jobs increase for the month doesn't cover the increase in population growth entering the jobs market.

It isn't important the reason the jobs report looks suspicious, or frankly whether it is accurate or not. Understand, I'm speaking purely from a political impact perspective here.

The fact that 70+ million people saw with their own lying eyes that Obama and the media have been bullshitting them about Romney not two days ago means that the strong seeds of doubt have been planted about anything pro-Obama that is put out by the media.

The conservative blogosphere and Romney partisans did a very good job of watering those seeds of doubt almost immediately this morning. Having a guy like Jack Welch call the numbers bullshit is very useful.

My point is that Obama and the media cooked their own goose by being so obviously crooked about Romney's character and proposals for the last 9 months. They are the little boy crying wolf.

Yeah, I'm sure there were. Just like Obama was just luring Romney into his 11th degree chess strategy by tanking the first debate, right?

When you have been shown to be a liar, and this is the media I'm talking about now, people tend to doubt your assertions in the future.

Obama and the media (BIRM) were shown out on Wednesday night to be blatant liars. And now the story comes out that job growth was the strongest in one month since 1983 at exactly the same time Obama needs some good news.

It may well have been.

But nobody outside Dem partisans believes the media now. Especially when such a number is so implausible and so convenient.

But let them high-five if that is what they were doing. They thought spending 200 million dollars over 9 months to tell stupid and easily refuted lies about Romney was a smart strategy.

That money was completely wasted as of 10:45 pm Eastern time on Wednesday.

It could go either way. If you look at the historic polls from 2004, Kerry was leading in Ohio during most of October - especially after the first debate that Kerry won (but it wasn't a blowout like the debate on Wednesday. (And the economy was much better than it is today). Bush took an average 2 pt lead in the polls in late October, and held it to the election.

Bush ended up winning 51-49.

Unlike 2004, where the turnout percentages were steady, this year's election turnout is a huge unknown. Obama won in Ohio in a big wave election D+8. But then there was a republican wave election in 2010 with a R+1 turnout that wiped out all state office democrats. Romney is currently leading independents in all polls, so this partisan turnout means everything. If Ohio goes R+1 this year (like 2010), Romney will surely win. If you have D+8 like 2008 than Obama will surely win.

So what will the turnout be in 2004. A lot of pollsters are splitting the difference - say D +4. But no one really knows. Clearly the turnout will be much less than 2008, as recent stories about early voting show.....

After this race polls will never again be so important. How campaigns are done changes in the US periodically and this is a time of change. Polls will never again be as accepted as they are now. Everyone understands that people begin to game the system whatever the system may be but up till now no one thought there was a way to game the polls. Well, there is. After this election, believing polls will seem as quaint as believing a TV product endorsement. Meanwhile we are stuck with the system sawing on our nerves till Election Day.

PS Only a little while back I would have said the debates were pointless because they were so stylized. Now I try to imagine the next one - I used to debate and I don't think Obama can improve very much in the time. He wasn't debating; he was repeating his campaign speeches and calling that being "visionary". And when Romney would say: "where did you get that so called fact"? Obama couldn't answer. I don't think he will be able to defend his foreign policy. Won the Nobel prize and bombed Lybia and picks drone targets - there's lot of stuff like that. If he does defend bombing and war and the effect of sanctions on civilians by saying he wanted to keep America safe, the left will hate him. If he doesn't defend it, what will he say?

Obama fucked up the debate because Mitt cheated by writing answers on his handkerchief.Obama fucked up the debate because he was too overtired and distracted by the Affairs of State.Obama fucked up the debate because he got some top-secret bad news right before he walked on stage.Obama fucked up the debate because of the mile-high atmosphere in Denver.Obama fucked up the debate because he's too good to argue with a Republican.Obama fucked up the debate because they wouldn't let him use his teleprompter.Obama fucked up the debate because he doesn't really want to be President but he's such a good guy that he's going to do it anyway.

Oh, and "You're a party of cranks and conspiracy theories, and ya'll are fucking embarrassing."

What a contrast (35+ / 0-)in responses to the jobs report: the President is pleased because folks are getting back to work -- and he also knows this is not a moment for jubilation -- just another stepping stone toward a sound economy.

Romney and the rest of the assholes who thrive on destroying this country are upset -- apoplectic -- accusing others of lying which is the biggest joke of all. Not once did Romney express pleasure about more Americans being employed -- even for temp work, which many of us would prefer to unemployment.

" My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total." Barbara Jordan, 1974

by gchaucer2 on Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 08:51:35 AM PDT

Well, they're traitors. It's just not considered (18+ / 0-)polite to be that explicit about it.

GM is right. We need to trust government reports--no matter how absurd or implausible. To glance at them with suspicion is the work of cranks and conspiracy theorists. I'm sure he gave George Bush and the Republicans of 2000-6 this same courtesy.

Trust your Federal Family. After all, we helped make this jobs report--because government is the name we give to the things we do together!

Oh, and GM: it's "y'all." Not "ya'll." I know you and Obama love affecting folksy airs, but you just sound retarded when you can't even spell a southern colloquialism right. Shiiiiiit.

It sounds so good to a lot of people to have someone "fighting" insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions.

I wonder how many people recall what "insurance" is?

If you go in business, and yes, it's a business designed to make its investors money...so here we go: you say that you'll accept a premium, sort of exactly like your auto insurance premium, right? And that you'll pay for a certain list of claims should they occur, for that premium. You are taking a risk here. Understood? Are the people whining about preexisting conditions still with me?

Good. So wouldn't it make sense, if you were still hoping to make an evil profit here, that if you agreed to cover someone who has huge, regular health care expenses - that his premium would be enough not only to cover that, but anything else that might creep in?

Well, you would think so! I'll admit, I don't understand this game of conflating "insurance" with "care" and calling it evil to adhere to the basic principles of business.

So here we are. Many, many people expecting expenses to be "covered" for no additional premium at all.

"I'd wager that only about 25% of the population knows what insurance actually is."

The PRESIDENT doesn't know what insurance actually is. Remember the health care summit story he told where he was confused about the difference between liability auto insurance and collision auto insurance? He purchased the legal minimum ins which didn't pay for property damage to owned vehicles then was all offended that his insurance wouldn't pay for his property damage in an accident. And then it apparently didn't occur to Mr. Harvard Law to go to the ins for the person who caused the accident.

So, according to numerous reports I've read in the media, the economy needs to generate about 150,000 jobs a month just to stay even with the number of new people entering the job market.

However today, the unemployment rate drops 3 tenths of a percent based on a September report of 114,000 new jobs (plus minor upgrades to the July and August numbers). And the media goes to great pains to explain that the drop IS NOT due to those who have given up looking for a job. Even though recent GDP reports showing almost no growth and a big loss in manufacturing jobs.

Oh, here we go. From Marketwatch:

State and local governments accounted for virtually all of the added job gains, mainly through the hiring of more teachers.

I don't know. It sounds like the county would have to hire a whole lot of teachers to lower the rate that much.

I live in Butler County Ohio, there is 100's and 100's of Yard Romney and Mandel signs. They are popping up everywhere, two more showed up on my street since Wed night, there was none on this street in 2008, including mine except for 2 Obama ones. The Obama ones are not back. Obama signs are pretty much not to be found. By our count, we are aware of 14 Obama signs, with 5 of them at the same place, the local Union hall. Oddly enough, there is no bumper stickers for any nominee to speak of. I have one and seen a Romney/Ryan one yesterday at Kroger. Would not surprise me that this county alone goes for Romney at over 100,000 votes alone.

For those who do want to keep updated, this blog has been a good source of information.

Do you bring that router into evidence or what

Yes. The motion to squash that evidence was denied, and the email messages sent on the private/secret router will used in Kelly Rindfleisch's trial. If Walker is indicted (he may be cutting a deal and rolling over on someone higher up) then that evidence will most likely be used against him as well.

bozo...shit for brains

Do you get in a lot of physical fights while out in public, or do you only behave like this while online?

Over at HedgeZero.com they are perplexed by the good employment numbers. They can't explain why the Labor Department's numbers would include a huge increase in employment among college age workers, a surge not seen since 1949. Read it, if you dare.

WSJ reports that 25 of the most prominent economist predicted no change for unemployment. Highest prediction was 8.2%, lowest 8.1%, average 8.1%, but what do they know, they don't use polls for their predictions.

Pauldar at 2:21, I see you live in the 8th Congressional District, which has been represented by the GOP for 125 of the last 150 years (more or less), uninterruptedly since 1939; wonder how many CDs can claim that distinction?